Plant Systematics and Evolution

, Volume 212, Issue 1–2, pp 135–141 | Cite as

Genome size variation inCajanus cajan (Fabaceae): A reconsideration

  • J. Greilhuber
  • R. Obermayer


A recent investigation of genome size in certain samples of the pigeonpea,Cajanus cajan, indicates values from 1.55 pg to 1.99 pg (1C level), which is 1.29-fold variation between accessions. In the present analysis those of these accessions which had particularly high or low DNA contents in that study were subjected to a reanalysis using propidium iodide and DAPI flow cytometry and Feulgen densitometry. Only minor differences in genome size, not more than 1.047-fold, were found with flow cytometry, and no significant differences were obtained with Feulgen densitometry. The previously reported genome size cannot be confirmed. It is about half as large and was determined in the present study as 0.825 pg (1C, propidium iodide flow cytometry,Glycine max as standard) and 0.853 pg (1C, Feulgen densitometry,Allium cepa andPisum sativum as standards), respectively.

Key words

Fabaceae Cajanus cajan Genome size variation flow cytometry propidium iodide DAPI Feulgen densitometry 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Baranyi, M., Greilhuber, J., 1995: Flow cytometric analysis of genome size variation in cultivated and wildPisum sativum (Fabaceae). — Pl. Syst. Evol.194: 231–239.Google Scholar
  2. , 1996: Flow cytometric and Feulgen densitometric analysis of genome size variation inPisum. — Theor. Appl. Genet.92: 297–307.Google Scholar
  3. , 1996: Genome size in wildPisum species. — Theor. Appl. Genet.93: 717–721.Google Scholar
  4. Bennett, M. D., Leitch, I. J., 1995: Nuclear DNA amounts in angiosperms. — Ann. Bot.76: 113–176.Google Scholar
  5. , 1976: Nuclear DNA amounts in angiosperms. — Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. London B274: 227–274.Google Scholar
  6. Doležel, J., 1991: Flow cytometric analysis of nuclear DNA content in higher plants. — Phytochem. Anal.2: 143–154.Google Scholar
  7. , 1994: Flow cytometric estimation of nuclear DNA amount in diploid bananas (Musa acuminata andM. balbisiana). — Biol. Pl.36: 351–357.Google Scholar
  8. Greilhuber, J., 1986: Severely distorted Feulgen-DNA amounts inPinus (Coniferophytina) after nonadditive fixations as a result of meristematic self-tanning with vacuole contents. — Canad. J. Genet. Cytol.28: 409–415.Google Scholar
  9. , 1988a: “Self-tanning” — a new and important source of stoichiometric error in cytophotometric determination of nuclear DNA content in plants. — Pl. Syst. Evol.158: 87–96.Google Scholar
  10. , 1988b: Critical reassessment of DNA content variation in plants. — InBrandham, P. E., (Ed.): Kew Chromosome Conference III, pp. 39–50. — London: HMSO.Google Scholar
  11. , 1994: Genome size variation inPisum sativum. — Genome37: 646–655.Google Scholar
  12. , 1997: Genome size and maturity group inGlycine max (soybean). — Heredity78: 547–551.Google Scholar
  13. , 1983: Genome size of man and animals relative to the plantAllium cepa. — Canad. J. Genet. Cytol.25: 554–560.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Hammatt, N., Blackhall, N. W., Davey, M. R., 1991: Variation in the DNA content ofGlycine species. — J. Exp. Bot.42: 659–665.Google Scholar
  15. König, C., Ebert, I., Greilhuber, J., 1987: A DNA cytophotometric and chromosome banding study inHedera helix (Araliaceae), with reference to differential DNA replication associated with juvenile-adult phase change. — Genome29: 498–503.Google Scholar
  16. Ohri, D., Jha, S., Kumar, S., 1994: Variability in nuclear DNA content within pigeonpea,Cajanus cajan (Fabaceae). — Pl. Syst. Evol.189: 211–216.Google Scholar
  17. Rohlf, F. J., 1992: BIOM. A package of statistical programs to accompany the text “Biometry”. — New York: Applied Biostatistics.Google Scholar
  18. Teoh, S. B., Rees, H., 1976: Nuclear DNA amounts in populations ofPicea andPinus species. — Heredity36: 123–137.Google Scholar
  19. Ulrich, I., Ulrich, W., 1991: High-resolution flow cytometry of nuclear DNA in higher plants. — Protoplasma165: 212–215.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Greilhuber
    • 1
  • R. Obermayer
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of BotanyUniversity of ViennaWienAustria

Personalised recommendations